• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Split Thread Issues around language and offense, with reference to transgenderism.

wareyin said:
You do realize that there are ways to discuss being transgender that don't require language along the lines of 'you are defective, you genetic defect', right? You keep going on about Down Syndrome, but I notice you are being careful to use the term 'Down Syndrome', rather than anything as emotionally charged as "defect", so I can't help but think you are capable of discussing things without using emotionally charged language.
Click to expand...

What I notice is that you are avoiding the question altogether. I'm not asking you if you would avoid saying that Down Syndrome is a defect when talking to the parents of one such individual. I'm asking you if Down Syndrome is a genetic defect.

Yes or no?
 
quadraginta said:
I thought you didn't let things like that bother you.

You seem bothered.
Click to expand...

I'm not bothered, but I am growing weary of so-called skeptics using, as you just did, infantile tactics rather than reasoned cases. Apparently, emotional arguments and reasoning are the only things that people throw at me on this topic. It's no better than the conservative "oh noes! Perverts everywhere!" fear-mongering.

I can only wonder why you'd take the time to make a post like that just to try and throw the "emotional" accusation back in my face. Is it because you read my own post with a tone that wasn't in it? Or is it because you cannot view this topic dispassionately? Or perhaps this is deliberate.
 
Argumemnon said:
I'm not bothered, but I am growing weary of so-called skeptics using, as you just did, infantile tactics rather than reasoned cases. Apparently, emotional arguments and reasoning are the only things that people throw at me on this topic. It's no better than the conservative "oh noes! Perverts everywhere!" fear-mongering.

I can only wonder why you'd take the time to make a post like that just to try and throw the "emotional" accusation back in my face. Is it because you read my own post with a tone that wasn't in it? Or is it because you cannot view this topic dispassionately? Or perhaps this is deliberate.
Click to expand...


Seeing you go on about "infantile tactics" strikes me as rather ironic.
 
Argumemnon said:
What I notice is that you are avoiding the question altogether. I'm not asking you if you would avoid saying that Down Syndrome is a defect when talking to the parents of one such individual. I'm asking you if Down Syndrome is a genetic defect.
Yes or no?
Click to expand...

Would "genetic anomaly" be acceptable to either of you?
 
Argumemnon said:
What I notice is that you are avoiding the question altogether. I'm not asking you if you would avoid saying that Down Syndrome is a defect when talking to the parents of one such individual. I'm asking you if Down Syndrome is a genetic defect.

Yes or no?
Click to expand...

To the highlighted: Why not? You have no problem saying being transgender is a defect when talking to the family, friends, and (I assume) at least one transgender person in this conversation. Again, your choice to not use purely clinical descriptions that you know carry emotional baggage shows that you are capable of doing so.

To attempt to put it in perspective: But look at how language has been twisted in order to avoid offending people, with the result that people are even more sensitive now. You can't even call someone disabled mongoloid (or retarded) anymore for fear of someone, somewhere, taking it wrong, even if said person isn't even the disabled one. No, they're differently abled have Down Syndrome. Isn't that insulting and infantilising?

Once again: no one's saying that we should insult people deliberately, but rather that at some point we should grow thicker skins and accept that 1) some people are jerks, 2) your negative reaction to a word does not make that word or the speaker bigoted or demeaning and 3) we shouldn't shy away from accurate language.
 
Argumemnon said:
And that's all that matters, apparently.
Click to expand...

Your false dichotomy aside, it certainly does matter. This isn't an all or nothing concept, so it can be one of the things that matter. Again, you recognize this for Down Syndrome, but refuse to apply the same concept here.
 
wareyin said:
Your false dichotomy aside, it certainly does matter.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it didn't, so your accusation of false dichotomy is, again, only a result of your own black-and-white thinking, despite what you say after this.

Again, you recognize this for Down Syndrome, but refuse to apply the same concept here
Click to expand...

That's amusing since I've drawn a parallel between the two specifically because I apply the same concept to both.

Are you sure you're reading my posts carefully?
 
Argumemnon said:
I didn't say it didn't, so your accusation of false dichotomy is, again, only a result of your own black-and-white thinking, despite what you say after this.
Click to expand...

As evidenced by your own posts, it either doesn't matter, or it's all that matters. False dichotomy. Your claim of black-and-white thinking is projection, plain and simple.

Argumemnon said:
That's amusing since I've drawn a parallel between the two specifically because I apply the same concept to both.

Are you sure you're reading my posts carefully?
Click to expand...

O'rly? You recognize that calling a person with Down Syndrome a "defect" when talking to their parents might be offensive, yet have no problem calling a person who is transgender a "defect" when talking to their family, friends, and even to their face. Are you sure you're applying the same concept to both?
 
wareyin said:
As evidenced by your own posts, it either doesn't matter, or it's all that matters. False dichotomy.
Click to expand...

I have not said, thought or implied anything of the sort. Your reading comprehension is either terible or neutered by your ideology.

Now, answer my question, or admit that you're wrong.

You recognize that calling a person with Down Syndrome a "defect" when talking to their parents might be offensive, yet have no problem calling a person who is transgender a "defect" when talking to their family, friends, and even to their face.
Click to expand...

What are you babbling about? The post you linked to says nothing of the sort. Again, you apparently can't understand plain English.
 
wareyin said:
You recognize that calling a person with Down Syndrome a "defect" when talking to their parents might be offensive, yet have no problem calling a person who is transgender a "defect" when talking to their family, friends, and even to their face. Are you sure you're applying the same concept to both?
Click to expand...

Who is talking about calling a person a defect? We are talking about calling a particular trait a defect. Do you not recognize that this is very different?
 
AdamSK said:
Who is talking about calling a person a defect? We are talking about calling a particular trait a defect. Do you not recognize that this is very different?
Click to expand...
We can call a trait a defect, or defective, if we are in an academic or scientific setting. This is not that setting. When in a social setting, talking about the cultural and legal treatment of people with that trait, it is no longer very different.
 
Argumemnon said:
I have not said, thought or implied anything of the sort. Your reading comprehension is either terible or neutered by your ideology.
Click to expand...

Sigh, now I'm going to quote you saying these very things, and you're going to ignore that and respond to something else. This gets old, fast. To wit:

Argumemnon said:
wareyin said:
Noztradamus said:
Would "genetic anomaly" be acceptable to either of you?
Click to expand...
I think "anomaly" carries a lot less emotional baggage than "defect" does.
Click to expand...
And that's all that matters, apparently.
Click to expand...

I claim that something carries less baggage, you respond with sarcastic claims about "all that matters".


Argumemnon said:
Now, answer my question, or admit that you're wrong.
Click to expand...

That's now how things work around here.



Argumemnon said:
What are you babbling about? The post you linked to says nothing of the sort. Again, you apparently can't understand plain English.
Click to expand...

And for evidence that your post does say it, I will quote and highlight it, and you will ignore it:
Argumemnon said:
I'm not asking you if you would avoid saying that Down Syndrome is a defect when talking to the parents of one such individual. I'm asking you if Down Syndrome is a genetic defect.
Click to expand...
 
wareyin said:
Sigh, now I'm going to quote you saying these very things,
Click to expand...

Except you didn't. None of your quotes are Arg saying that emotional baggage doesn't matter at all, or otherwise implying a false dichotomy.
 
wareyin said:
Sigh, now I'm going to quote you saying these very things, and you're going to ignore that and respond to something else.
Click to expand...

Now you're descending into plain lying. I am not doing this. If anyone is ignoring something, it is you ignoring my question.

The highlighted part should have given you a hint about what I saw saying: that it isn't ALL that matters.

That's now how things work around here.
Click to expand...

Why do you keep dodging this? Is Down Syndrome a genetic defect or not?

And for evidence that your post does say it, I will quote and highlight it, and you will ignore it:
Click to expand...

I won't ignore it. I will address it: it doesn't say what you claimed that it said. I said:

I'm not asking you if you would avoid saying that Down Syndrome is a defect when talking to the parents of one such individual.
Click to expand...

I was saying that I was NOT asking you if you would avoid it. How do you interpret it to mean that I would avoid it myself? Do you not see that those are two completely different things?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom